3 ms·

But, to use your analogy, why would companies treat user data like uranium when risk/reward is like that of oil? Grinder surely made much more from data sales

by cik2e 5y ago

But, to use your analogy, why would companies treat user data like uranium when risk/reward is like that of oil? Grinder surely made much more from data sales than the 6.something million Erous it was find. The paltry fines under GDPR do nothing to dissuade this behavio. That's been a recurring theme in previous HN discussions on this topic. Right now, I would posit that these low penalties are for show. Governments don't want to lose the economic benefit of having these companies operate in the EU and the general public can be satisfied that their governments are on top of the issue.

MauranKilom 5y ago
> Grinder surely made much more from data sales than the 6.something million Erous it was find. ...sure, but they also had business expenses. Fining them for all the revenue would more or less instantly kill the company, which is hardly the goal.
- cik2e 5y ago
  I've got an estimate here that says Grindr is doing 31 million dollars net on over 100 mil revenue per year. I am by no means in favor of running these companies into the ground. The fines are definitely a balancing act. But it seems at the present moment the expected value of breaking the rules is substantily higher than 0. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-ppp-grindr-idUSKBN247308 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-ppp-gr...
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    Wait until they try this again. It may not be the Norwegian DPA that acts the next time around, it could be the UK DPO, the Dutch AP or any one of a whole raft of others, and they'll all take into account that they were already fined once before. This fine is level '2', apparently you ignored the first warning so now you get a major but not crippling fine. The next one will not be at that level, there is a pretty clear progression for repeat fines. One case, a hospital first got a warning, then a small fine and then a mid six figure fine for a case involving a single patient. You can rely on them having learned their lesson and that there will not be a third fine.

by cik2e 5y ago

MauranKilom 5y ago

> Grinder surely made much more from data sales than the 6.something million Erous it was find. ...sure, but they also had business expenses. Fining them for all the revenue would more or less instantly kill the company, which is hardly the goal.

cik2e 5y ago
I've got an estimate here that says Grindr is doing 31 million dollars net on over 100 mil revenue per year. I am by no means in favor of running these companies into the ground. The fines are definitely a balancing act. But it seems at the present moment the expected value of breaking the rules is substantily higher than 0. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-ppp-grindr-idUSKBN247308 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-ppp-gr...
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Wait until they try this again. It may not be the Norwegian DPA that acts the next time around, it could be the UK DPO, the Dutch AP or any one of a whole raft of others, and they'll all take into account that they were already fined once before. This fine is level '2', apparently you ignored the first warning so now you get a major but not crippling fine. The next one will not be at that level, there is a pretty clear progression for repeat fines. One case, a hospital first got a warning, then a small fine and then a mid six figure fine for a case involving a single patient. You can rely on them having learned their lesson and that there will not be a third fine.